Is bad publicity really better than no publicity?
David Blackburn 4:13pm
The Liberal Democrat's party conference is the one occasion when they are guaranteed what they need most: publicity. This year has seen them dominate the headlines, albeit negatively.
Unashamedly public in-fighting followed Nick Clegg’s extraordinary pronouncement about “savage cuts”. Steve Webb’s rejection of Clegg’s plans to tighten up ‘middle-class benefits’ and Charles Kennedy’s thinly veiled call to arms against the proposed abolition of the pledge to abolish tuition fees were minor squabbles compared to the Mansions tax debacle.
Yesterday, I suggested the proposal was sensible; it isn't. In theory it’s not a bad idea for a targeted super tax (a fiscal expedient necessary for tackling Brown’s deficit), but the Lib Dems have no idea how the tax will be raised or whether there will be exclusions based on the inability to pay. The revelations about the lack of consultation illustrate just how at war the party is with itself and its duopolistic leadership.
The damage continues. Today produced the cream of the crop: Chris Huhne’s planned slur that William Hague was like the skinheads of yesteryear who haunted the Continent’s beer cellars. The head of the anti-Tory attack unit is a very well-educated man of vast extra-political experience, so I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt and say he planned to allude to the bald and beery Otto von Bismarck. But, as Alex Massie notes, the deluge of negative publicity has confirmed that the Lib Dems are politically hopeless: a party that wields the policy scatter gun so unadvisedly has no more direction or appeal than one that’s ideologically bereft. No publicity would have been better.
Previous
TrevorsDen
September 22nd, 2009 4:43pm Report this commentLiberal policies are scattergun because they want to be all things to all men.
Not so much two faced as dodecahedron faced.
Certainly they have shot themselves in the foot with their scattergun this week.
Sir Graphus
September 22nd, 2009 5:11pm Report this commentThey have given the impression of being totally disorganised, and not having any sort of direction. I don't believe they've ever thought they would form the next govt, but they have the best chance they'll ever have of being the next main opposition party, and I would say they've blown that.
Furthermore, they inexplicably hold at least 3 seats with unusually high property values. I hope, for their sakes, they did their voter demographics in those constituencies very carefully indeed.
Robert Eve
September 22nd, 2009 5:29pm Report this commentI predict the Lib Dems will lose more seats than they gain at the General Election.
kinglear
September 22nd, 2009 6:31pm Report this commentI've said this before and I'll say it again - they will be under 40 seats and possibly under 20
Super Blue
September 22nd, 2009 6:50pm Report this comment@ Sir Graphus: One of those is Twickenham which will hopefully go wi-fi soon;)
Nicholas Hallam
September 22nd, 2009 7:20pm Report this commentI doubt that this will have much impact on their support in the General Election. People don't vote LibDem thinking their policies will be implemented.
Wotcher
September 22nd, 2009 9:47pm Report this commentSeems like clear evidence of a lack of leadership. It always baffled me that the Lib Dems kicked out their most electorally successful leader ever, replaced him with a credible, if dull, elder statesman and then defenestrated the aforementioned for a young millionaire who was merely full of himself and not much else.
Damon
September 23rd, 2009 8:59am Report this commentVince Cable's new property tax may be daft. But lets remember its nowhere near as economic nonsense as the Conservative's proposal to retain Labour's 50% income tax rate.
Back to top